A Toronto controller, not realizing his mike was open and blocking aircraft readbacks, lets loose a series of swear words. Ouch!

(Clip contains words that may be offensive to some - listener discretion advised)

Note that I included a minute or two of responses after the slip-up in this clip, but they are somewhat disjointed due to this feed scanning other frequencies. The gist of the conversation is very obvious, however.

I was wondering why I hadn't heard my favourite guy for a while. That's shocking. After listening to the Toronto feed for a year and a half, that's my favourite controller, for certain. Really unlucky that the pilot that called right after happened to be a woman. This controller showed nothing but enthusiasm and class, I looked forward to hearing him. Shame, really.

This is the controller who handled Air France 358 as he came in on August 2, 2005. After the crash, he expedited a heavy KLM flight and a few Air Canada's off the 24L localizer to their alternates, while sounding stressed because he didn't know the severity of the AF incident, but he handled it well.

Hope he gets back to work soon, and that this doesn't impact his controlling future.

Also, Adrian8, it wasn't unlucky. That's who he was insulting. He thought she wasn't responding.

In the A.net thread they're making a good case that he was referring to the communications equipment and whatever was happening, not specifically the female pilot. Even so, I said "unlucky" because controllers lots of things about pilots under their breath, it was just unlucky that this one got on frequency.

Ouch I feel bad for that guy. I think it's kind of unfair that he gets in so much trouble over this; he didn't even know he was transmitting, and was frustrated that pilots were not receiving his transmissions. Didn't he swear at the first pilot to say no offense and not the woman pilot?

In the A.net thread they're making a good case that he was referring to the communications equipment and whatever was happening, not specifically the female pilot.

Sorry. I don't buy that. If you listen to the unedited version, at 28:09 she checks in and he radar identifies her. From then on, there's no question that there's a woman associated with that callsign. Besides which, he wasn't aware that he had an equipment problem until after he'd said it.

In the A.net thread they're making a good case that he was referring to the communications equipment and whatever was happening, not specifically the female pilot.

Sorry. I don't buy that. If you listen to the unedited version, at 28:09 she checks in and he radar identifies her. From then on, there's no question that there's a woman associated with that callsign. Besides which, he wasn't aware that he had an equipment problem until after he'd said it.

Exactly what I was thinking. She was very gracious to give him the "out" that she did.

In the A.net thread they're making a good case that he was referring to the communications equipment and whatever was happening, not specifically the female pilot.

Sorry. I don't buy that. If you listen to the unedited version, at 28:09 she checks in and he radar identifies her. From then on, there's no question that there's a woman associated with that callsign. Besides which, he wasn't aware that he had an equipment problem until after he'd said it.

Exactly what I was thinking. She was very gracious to give him the "out" that she did.

That's most likely the case here, as dissapointing as it is. I was just curious as to why several pilots piped in to say that he was referring to the equipment, and was stressed out etc. The woman that says "I don't think he was reffering to the female pilot of Air Canada", who was that?

I was just curious as to why several pilots piped in to say that he was referring to the equipment, and was stressed out etc.

Speaking as a general aviation IFR pilot, I suspect that the pilots recognized the controller was stressed and were giving him a break. Additionally, it sounds much more professional to offer compassion over the airwaves rather than condemnation.

Without going back and listening to the clip again, was it not a mainline Air Canada pilot that commented that he was flying with a female FO that night, and in 32 years he'd never heard anything like that? I think that may be the source of some confusion. I still have no doubt that the controller was referring to the female Jazz pilot.

And I do have to say that she definitely is a class act. If anyone had reason to make a fuss, it was her, and she was perfectly calm and non-accusatory about the whole thing.

In my opinion, he clearly wasn't aiming anything at her. I don't see why he should get anything more than a reminder that the mic can be stuck.

Swearing over a public-accessible frequency is against FCC (Federal Communications Commission) regulations here in the States and can result in some hefty fines from that governing body. You just need to look at Howard Stern for proof of that. Canada's FCC-equivalent has similar, if not tougher, rules. And yes, the FCC in the States does control some aspects of air-to-air and air-to-ground communication frequencies. I would imagine that this is the same in Canada.

Regardless of where his tirade was directed, the controller swore over the air. The fine was probably from the FCC-equivalent branch of the government (assuming there was one actually levied) and the suspension was most likely handed down by the agency for which he was working.

Swearing over a public-accessible frequency is against FCC (Federal Communications Commission) regulations here in the States and can result in some hefty fines [/quote]

Very well stated, As a amateur radio operator, and a Ship Station license holder, and for pretty much all radio services, the penalties for making profane statements is pretty much the same. a $10,000 fine and or 10 years in prison, plus the revokation of ones operating permit. Weather or not it is directed toward anyone, or unintentional.

My mother is also a dispatcher for Highway Patrol, and if she made such a blunder, she would be looking at immediate termination, possibly without even much of an investigation, but the Lt. listening to the tapes. Even though the same could be said that she works in a stressfull enviroment.

It's too bad this happened, especially if he was a good controller, but this sort of thing just isn't tollerated in many work places.

The difference between the personalities stated and the unfortunate controller is that the controller did not intentionally make the broadcast. I suppose the guys who want him hanged have never made a mistake...Let those without sin cast the first stone...

. I suppose the guys who want him hanged have never made a mistake...Let those without sin cast the first stone...

I am not sure to whom you are directing this but since I replied to you the first time, I'll assume it was me. My post was simply stating a fact that the action itself was against a regulation, not implying innocence or guilt. Unlike your post, mine was devoid of opinion.